coins

ErinInTheMorning, a trans rights blog, recently posted about Fenway Health (Boston-based non-profit LGBTQ health center) kowtowing to the demands of the executive branch:

In a move that shocked families, patients, and trans rights advocates, Fenway Health, the non-profit community LGBTQ+ health center headquartered in Boston, has ceased providing puberty blockers and hormone treatment for trans youth under the age of 19.

This means even 18-year-olds—legal adults—will be impacted by the restrictions. Those under the cut-off will no longer be able to access these evidence-based best practices in care for transgender young people

Perhaps the most damning line from this article is near the middle:

Fenway chose to comply in advance

The top comment agrees with the tone of the article:

My PCP explicitly consoled me by saying that their new board member, Dallas Ducar, was hired to help find creative ways for all of their patients to retain access should the law turn. I feel very betrayed

In their defense…

On the one hand, I, too, am appalled that the federal government—and the “party of small government”, no less—can wield and weaponize healthcare funding it doesn’t “agree” with, and that a local organization would fold rather than fight it. It seems obvious to me that their mandate is to help people.

However, I saw an interesting counter-argument on UniversalHub by user dwhogan:

Fenway simply isn’t in a position to resist given the vital medical care they provide to their patient base such as HIV medication, diabetes medication, blood thinners, and any number of other crucial medical services that this very community depends upon.

Yes, it’s awful that people under 19 will not be able to access gender affirming care. Some of my best friends are trans and my wife is non-binary (and also used to work at Fenway during some of the worst of the last few years); these changes to practices are very much not in line with the belief of everyone who works there. They are not in a position to push back unless they want to force the people who do receive care there to seek out new primary care options.

It’s a tough spot; fighting back could largely end up being a symbolic, pyrrhic victory that leaves many without access to care they previously had. But if I were a member of the trans community, I couldn’t help but feel like I was being thrown under the bus to satisfy an administration with a track record of harassing Massachusetts institutions. It’s hard to take a stance on this without feeling like you’re ignoring a huge piece of the puzzle.

User SomervilleSteve weighed in:

Fenway feels like it can’t risk the fight. As a queer man & longtime Fenway patient, I say we cannot risk compliance with a tyrannical and unconstitutional regime.

Ultimately, I can see it both ways, and have been flip-flopping back and forth on where I stand. There isn’t a guide for resisting authoritarianism, and I’m not sure anyone can make a compelling, definite argument for the role of a healthcare facility in times like this. It’s ugly stuff, but I think the key going forward is leaning on our representatives for state-level protections and continued resistance against federal overreach from our local politicians.